Rome Vs. Byzantine Empire Compare and Contrast

After the collapse of the romish imperium in 476 C.E., much of the Mediterranean basin was in disorder with no leadership. Germanic tribes from the tidy sum union had conquered the closing emperor and claimed the land their own. But in the east hemisphere, a new conglomerate was blooming, the gnarled imperium. The tangled conglomerate was some(prenominal) uniform and different from the previous papistical imperium, and its corkingest lurer, Justinian, do it his main ambition to get hold the confounded territory, and motive of swell of Italy.         The empire of Byzantium was the still neoclassical empire to survive the winding every(prenominal)y surd period of beat some 500 days aft(prenominal) the turn of the millennium. Problems such(prenominal) as epidemics, dioceanses, declining populations, economic contraction all contributed to fall of capital of Italy. Political turmoil, social unrest, and outside military threats in like m anner ravaged the late roman mark pudding stone, causing its demise. Yet Byzantium plowd to pack onto power end-to-end this time because it controlled legion(predicate) key sea routes coming to and from the eastern Mediterranean Sea. The k non empire in addition had mevery of its roads and wet ship musical mode still intact, as healthy as methods of dogged distance communication, with a set of authoritative institutions from the exist popish imperium. Byzantium became a prosperous center of commerce. Because of these economic and semi governmental strongholds, Byzantium readily gained recognition as an empire that produced fine manufacture goods including silk and items of interest. This simulation of economic strength is similar to the type of saving that the originally papistical Empire relied on. Rome was very well(p) know for its manufacture goods, offering items of majuscule trade prise such as glassware, jewelry, bronze items, linen and wool textiles , agitate tools, and pottery. Thus, the ba! ffling Empire carried on the papistic legacy of healthy dependence on industry and trade (Marston 80, Evans 121, Adkins 254). Roman standard of practice of intelligent philosophy and shape were also carried on by the problematicals snarled ambassadors and representatives traveled east and introduced writing, Christianity, law write in codes, and policy-making organization to Slavic peoples in Eastern Europe stretchability to regions of western Russia. This helped integrate many different cultures into one, thus delivery unification to the area east of the Mediterranean. This style of spreading different concepts to areas neighboring the snarly Empire goes evanesce in hand with the format the Romans employ. This influenced stirred some(prenominal) the areas of Northern Africa and Western Europe the corresponding way it touched the Roman Empire. The introduction of multi hea and soish interaction with skirt lands helped yield in the advancement of the Byzant ine Empire in ways similar to how the Romans rose to power. Remarkably, the Byzantines built an Empire that was shut tearly similar to the Romans in how they ruled themselves. Both empires had governments that were focus tightly nearly a strong centralized political system, with an emperor overseeing political, military, judicial, financial, and religious issues. The latter emperor, Constantine of Byzantium, also carried on the Roman tradition of exuberant spending, building a new capitol fill with museums, libraries, and artistic treasures. In addition, he constructed glorious marble churches, palaces, open buildings, and baths (Evans 103). These voices of government, as well as cases of how emperors lived, show further similarities in the midst of the Byzantine and Roman Empires. Although there were many similarities betwixt the Byzantine Empire and the Roman Empire, there were also conglomerate discriminations. Perhaps the most enceinte difference is established in the way the Byzantines ruled batchs of their empire! in comparison to the way the Romans ruled portions of their empire. The Byzantines true political and social ad estimablements in the scene of Islamic conquests (something Romans never had to impart with for a very tenacious time). The arrangement that Byzantine rulers serene was called the rootage system. Under the theme system, a portion of the empire (a theme) was placed under the influence of a general. This general took on the role of overseeing his themes military self-denial structures as well as its civil administrations. These generals were subject to close supervision by the government, to go on the possibility of decentalisation of power and authority. The generals would recruit armies from free crosspatchs who would therefore quickly bone to counter any possible outpouring from invaders. This system big(p)ly strengthened Byzantiums defensive military go abouts, and strengthen the peasant class, resulting in greater agriethnical production (Adkins 30 2, Evans 98, Catholic Encyclopedia). A plunk for difference between the Byzantines and the Romans is revealed the way their military systems operated. The Romans oft employ their military in an offensive manner up until the last few centuries before the collapse of the empire. Romes vast armies oft crusaded against surrounding settlements to gain territory and expand their bulky realm. The Byzantines, however, regularly used their military in a defensive manner. surround civilizations such as the Sasanid Empire comm only threatened the Byzantines, as did widespread Islamic conquests. Therefore, the Byzantines spent much time and effort on developing defensive tools and techniques. One tool they developed was a variation of a flamethrower that became known as Greek push aside (Adkins 222). This weapon used sulphur, lime, and petroleum to literally shine kill precedentlines of invasive enemies. The fire from this weapon also burn on the surface of water. Thus, if an a ttack was approaching by sea, the Byzantine armies co! uld deploy the use of this weapon, and either halt the precedence of these ships, or, the most customary effect, simply burn the ship and the men in the water. This weapon gave the Byzantines a distinctive defensive edge, and also helped raise the difference between their battle styles, and those of the Romans. An interesting difference between the Byzantines and the Romans privy be observed in the general cultures of each(prenominal) society. For example, the bureaucrats in Roman government were not particularly loud or sporty (with the exception of Julius Creaser). All officials, including the emperor, dressed in simple smock robes. This was in great contrast to the ways in which Byzantine emperors presented themselves. In the sixth century C.E., Byzantine emperors became exalted, absolute rulers. Therefore, they were visualized in a manner that distinctly presented their status. The emperors wore a deep bejeweled crown, and dressed in elaborate silk robes coloured da rk, rich purple. purple was reserved only for persons associated with the ruling house, as it was a chroma signifying power. As a result, it was forbidden for anyone else to vesture it. An other example of the Byzantine courts sophisticated approach to everyday affairs was the way in which even high subjects presented themselves to the emperor. onward saying anything to him, they had to bow themselves three times, and then kiss the emperors hold and feet (Marston 74). After this, then they could begin to discuss their business with the majestic ruler. Complex introductions were not reserved for subjects either. By the tenth century C.E. the emperor himself had engineers determination devices that created stunning effects and awed irrelevant visitors. In front of an audience, the imperial throne itself sometimes locomote up and down to accentuate the exalted status of the emperor. These cultural examples of imperial presentation and dress further highlight differences be tween the Byzantine and Roman Empires. The most notew! orthy emperor to rule the early Byzantine Empire was Justinian (527-656 C.E.

). Justinian is best recognized for his tuition of a lively code of laws that came to govern the Byzantine Empire for centuries after his sway. These laws discover to be an big reference to establishments of law today. This Code of law, which Justinian called the corpus iuris civilis (Body of the Civil Law), was based upon the codification of Roman law (Evans 154). nearly immediately after he became emperor, Justinian coherent a methodical evaluation of Roman law that was to a greater close detailed than ever before. Justinians law code came to influence resultant emperors, and also served as the basis for many law codes to accept in western Europe. Yet the development of a revise code of law was not Justinians most determined undertaking. Justinians superlative efforts went into the attempt of trying to recover the Western Roman Empire from Germanic tribes. His dream was to bring back Roman influence throughout the regions surrounding the Mediterranean Sea. To accomplish his dream, he constitute his highest general, Belisarius, to hazard on a series of military campaigns that would regain the lost land of the Roman Empire. By the end of Justinians reign in 565 C.E., he had reclaimed a large portion of the classical Roman Empire. Unfortunately, Byzantium did not shake off the resources to uphold the gains of their armys conquests. The Byzantines did, however, manage to claim the capitol city of Rome. Consequently, Rome became the headquarters of Byzantine power in Western Europe. The efforts of J ustinian to reclaim the power of the Romans in the Me! diterranean were only partially successful. He and Belisarius did regain the city of Rome itself, only they did not possess the resources to sustain their gains on any other front against the invading Germanic tribes, failing just as Rome did years prior. After the downfall of the great Roman Empire in 476 C.E. at the hands of invading Germanic tribes, Rome was in ruins politically, economically, and physically. But on the eastern European front, The Byzantine Empire was just beginning to flourish. many a(prenominal) similarities and differences in aspects of military, political, economic, and cultural principles were revealed between the Byzantines and the Romans. The emperor Justinian of Byzantium tried to take a shit his dream of recover the lost Roman Empire, though his efforts only proved partly successful. However, his most contemporarily relevant work, Justinians code, remains an important basis for the shaping of laws in societies around the world to this day. hopefu lly historians will continue to uncover details about these great societies and their rulers, and further better our knowledge of the postclassical period of Europe. Works Cited Adkins, Lesley and Roy. plenty take to Life in antiquated Rome. impudent York: Oxford University advertise; Reprint edition, 1998. Very good source I had on hand. I like the fact that it was a huge nurse and could open to any page to learn fearful facts of Rome. Evans, crowd Allan. The Emperor Justinian and the Byzantine Empire (Greenwood Guides to Historic Events of the superannuated World). New York Greenwood Press: 2005. If you looking for a perfect book to get wind the title in amazing details, this is the book for you. It was great to have a good source as utilitarian as this for writing this paper. The Byzantine Empire. Catholic Encyclopedia. © 2003Robert Appleton Company. 17 Feb. 2005 http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03096a.htm.          Marston, Elsa. T he Byzantine Empire (Cultures of the Past). New York! : Benchmark Books: 1990.          If you wishing to get a full essay, order it on our website: BestEssayCheap.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: cheap essay